Sunday, November 29, 2020

Suspecting infidelity: Greater reported suspicion-related distress, depression, physical health symptoms, & risky health behavior, particularly those with higher beliefs in the importance of fidelity, or a history of infidelity

Suspicious minds: The psychological, physical and behavioral consequences of suspecting a partner’s infidelity. Daniel J. Weigel, M. Rosie Shrout. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, November 28, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407520975851

Abstract: Guided by transactional stress theory, this study examined the psychological, physical, and behavioral consequences of the suspicion of a partner’s infidelity. Survey data collected from 246 individuals revealed that suspecting a partner’s infidelity was associated with greater reported suspicion-related distress, depression, physical health symptoms, and risky health behavior. Mediation and moderated mediation analyses revealed that the relationship between suspected infidelity and well-being was indirectly affected by suspicion-related distress. The effects of suspected infidelity were particularly hard on those with higher beliefs in the importance of fidelity, a history of infidelity in the relationship, and higher relationship satisfaction. The findings show that the mere suspicion of a partner’s infidelity can have powerful psychological, physical, and behavioral consequences in romantic relationships.

Keywords: Health, infidelity, stress, suspicion, well-being



More attractive individuals are more likely to be invited to join, and join, both organizations and informal gatherings, particularly early in adult life

Physical Attractiveness, Halo Effects, and Social Joining. Carl L. Palmer  Rolfe Daus Peterson. Social Science Quarterly, November 27 2020. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.12892


Abstract

Objective: Scholarship in psychology on halo effects demonstrates the powerful effects attractiveness has on social interactions. Here, we consider the influence of physical attractiveness on the development of social capital through social joining. With the unavoidable nature of attractiveness biases, we argue that more physically attractive individuals should be increasingly likely to join social organizations, which have been shown to be important parts of broader social engagement and the growth of social capital.

Methods: Utilizing the Wisconsin Longitudinal Study and an original survey experiment, we find that individuals who are rated as more attractive are consistently more likely to participate in organizations, particularly early in adult life. These effects persist when controlling for socioeconomic variables like income and education.

Results: Our experimental results bolster these findings, showing that more attractive individuals are more likely to be invited to join both organizations and informal gatherings.

Conclusions: These findings suggest a further mechanism through which the development of social capital differs between individuals in society.

Despite negative vision on atheists, there is a positive view too—preferring atheist partners as party hosts, open-minded conversation partners, and science tutor

Moon, Jordan W., Jaimie Krems, and Adam B. Cohen. 2020. “Is There Anything Good About Atheists? Exploring Positive and Negative Stereotypes of the Religious and Nonreligious.” PsyArXiv. November 29. doi:10.31234/osf.io/8ksnd. Accepted at Social Psychological and Personality Science


Abstract: Negative stereotypes about atheists are widespread, robust, rooted in distrust, and linked to discrimination. Here, we examine whether social perceivers in the US might additionally hold any positive stereotypes about atheists (and corresponding negative stereotypes of the religious). Experiments 1 (N = 401) and 2 (N = 398, preregistered) used methods of intuitive stereotypes (the conjunction fallacy). People tended to stereotype atheists as fun, open-minded, and scientific—even as they harbor extreme intuitive anti-atheist prejudice in Experiment 2. Experiment 3 (N = 382) used a quasi-behavioral partner-choice paradigm, finding that most people choose atheist (versus religious) partners in stereotype-relevant domains. Overall, results suggest that people simultaneously possess negative and also positive stereotypes about atheists, but that corresponding negative stereotypes of the religious may be even stronger. These effects are robust among the nonreligious and somewhat religious, but evidence is mixed about whether the highly religious harbor these positive stereotypes.